Self-Consistency

Source: hooks/ways/meta/think/strategies/self-consistency.md

Signature

keywords: are we sure high stakes verify reasoning double check confident certain risky decision

Stages

1. Problem Reception

Frame the question precisely. What specific claim or decision needs verification?

2. Path Sampling

Reason through 3-5 independent paths to the answer. Each path should start from different assumptions or use different reasoning methods. Do not cross-reference paths while constructing them.

3. Answer Collection

State each path's conclusion clearly. One sentence per path.

4. Consistency Analysis

Compare the answers: - Agreement: All paths converge → high confidence in the answer - Majority: Most agree, one diverges → examine the divergent path for errors or edge cases - Split: No consensus → the disagreement IS the finding. The question may be ambiguous or context-dependent.

5. Consensus or Escalation

If majority agrees: that's the answer, with the divergent path noted as a caveat. If split: present the split to the user. The uncertainty is more valuable than a forced answer.